Legal insanity abounds

There are many ways to appraise the city's nonsensical civil suit against a prominent defense lawyer who managed to quash a murder charge against a client accused of killing her infant.

But no one can spin a case better than the dozen or so defense lawyers who showed up in federal court to support their beleaguered brother, the formidable Edward P. Ryan Jr., who rarely fits the role of victim.

'It's unfortunate that a person with his integrity has to take a pounding,' said David Cataldo outside federal court last week.

'The city needs more cases like this like Custer needs more Indians,' contended Stephen Gordon.

'This is unprecedented. I've never seen anything like it,' claimed William F. Sullivan.

Righteous indignation aside, you get the picture. Before we continue, some background is in order. Last year, Ryan filed a lawsuit on behalf of his client, Nga Truong, who was charged by Worcester police with smothering her infant son in 2008 based on what a judge later ruled was a coerced confession. Portions of the two-hour interrogation were broadcast by a National Public Radio affiliate, and detectives could be heard promising leniency and favors to the distraught 16year-old if she confessed.

Truong spent almost three years in jail awaiting trial before she was freed in 2011 when prosecutors dropped the murder charge. She is now suing the city for a host of civil rights violations.

Many would say that lawyer Ryan was a savior to a hapless young girl who faced a lifetime behind bars. Not city officials, however, who are basically telling Ryan this: If we're going down, we're taking you with us.

The city's lawsuit against Ryan claims that he waited too long to file the motion to suppress his client's police statement, thus increasing the time she spent in jail. Based on that logic, it's a wonder city lawyers aren't also suing the judge for her five-month delay in granting the motion. And while they're at it, why not blame Truong for succumbing to the aggressive police interrogation?

'The city's head is in the sand,' said lawyer Peter Ettenberg. 'They don't want to acknowledge any responsibility at all.'

At a hearing last week, Ryan's lawyer told U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Hillman that the city's maneuver raises all sorts of problems and delays in Truong's civil suit against the city. Some also believe the city is trying to force Ryan to drop the client he's represented for five years, and attempting to shift the focus from its own misconduct.

Judge Hillman seemed bemused at times by the city's argument. While City Solicitor David Moore claimed that Ryan took nearly two years to file his motion to suppress the confession, Hillman concluded it was only a year and a half.

'You're saying are you saying it wasn't just a delay, but the delay was unreasonable?' Hillman asked Moore.

'Absolutely,' Moore replied.

'How do we draw the line to force lawyers to file motions quickly?' Hillman asked, adding that a defense lawyer in a murder cases has a 'tough enough job' without 'looking over his shoulder.'

'There are standards of conduct that govern everything we do in this life,' Moore replied.

True enough. And if the city declines to review its own sorry conduct in this mess, it's learned nothing from its mistakes.

A former trial lawyer himself, Judge Hillman drew laughs from spectators when he referred to the schedule for his upcoming ruling.

'I'd like to take my time, but I wouldn't want anyone suing me for it,' he said.

It was a funny line, but one that also underscored the foolishness of this insulting lawsuit.